“It’s shocking that a candidate for president of the United States would go behind closed doors and declare to a group of wealthy donors that half the American people view themselves as ‘victims,’ entitled to handouts, and are unwilling to take ‘personal responsibility’ for their lives,” Messina said in a statment. “It’s hard to serve as president for all Americans when you’ve disdainfully written off half the nation.”

lol

I can't decide what to laugh at. That Romney was caught, that Messina doesn't think it is true, or that he thinks Obama (or any other President) doesn't "write off" half of the nation.

I have to think Romney never expected to win the nomination. And it is very difficult to believe he won Governor in MA._________________lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

Related_________________At the heart of the durability of mass schooling is a brilliantly designed power fragmentation system which distributes decision-making so widely among so many different warring interests that large-scale change is impossible to those without a codebook.

The Democrats are desperate to create a gaffe for Romney. They sneaked somebody into a fundraising dinner, to try and catch him saying something like Obama did (referring to the rednecks of Pennsylvania clinging to the bibles and guns).

This is no gaffe, it's a fact. It's not embarrassing to anybody. The only people who would be offended by it are those people who, in fact, have already decided to vote for Obama.

It's a non-event, other than to fapping zealots._________________Deja Moo: the feeling that you've heard this bull before

Coming from a guy who is supposedly trying to win enough hearts and minds of the american people to make him the president, I find it ridiculous. I also find it even more ridiculous to think that the 47% of americans who will vote Obama do it because they feel like victims and "pay no taxes". How about those people who will simply not vote for Romney because he's no better than Obama?_________________There is, a not-born, a not-become, a not-made, a not-compounded. If that unborn, not-become, not-made, not-compounded were not, there would be no escape from this here that is born, become, made and compounded. - Gautama Siddharta

I agree with his sentiment, but the fact of the matter is he said "pay no taxes" when in reality should have said "pay no **income** taxes**. So his number is flat out wrong (and he knows it).

His sentiment that people feel entitled to things is right on though. Try to take anything away from anybody and you get a bunch of bellyaching. Everyone wants someone to do something, they themselves just dont want to do anything.

I'm guessing that Romney is correct that many will vote for Obama simply because he will give them more things.

I really wish the Republicans had more modern moral/social bearings...._________________long is the way, and hard, that out of hell leads up to light...

Coming from a guy who is supposedly trying to win enough hearts and minds of the american people to make him the president, I find it ridiculous. I also find it even more ridiculous to think that the 47% of americans who will vote Obama do it because they feel like victims and "pay no taxes". How about those people who will simply not vote for Romney because he's no better than Obama?

at least he is willing to state that too large of a population of USian citizens are dependent upon their government for their livelihood.

I agree with his sentiment, but the fact of the matter is he said "pay no taxes" when in reality should have said "pay no **income** taxes**. So his number is flat out wrong (and he knows it).

His sentiment that people feel entitled to things is right on though. Try to take anything away from anybody and you get a bunch of bellyaching. Everyone wants someone to do something, they themselves just dont want to do anything.

I'm guessing that Romney is correct that many will vote for Obama simply because he will give them more things.

I really wish the Republicans had more modern moral/social bearings....

It is a quibble to insist "income taxes" or "federal income taxes" be explicitly stated.
It should be clear from the context.

Coming from a guy who is supposedly trying to win enough hearts and minds of the american people to make him the president, I find it ridiculous. I also find it even more ridiculous to think that the 47% of americans who will vote Obama do it because they feel like victims and "pay no taxes". How about those people who will simply not vote for Romney because he's no better than Obama?

at least he is willing to state that too large of a population of USian citizens are dependent upon their government for their livelihood.

frankly, its true.

But, high unemployment creates the appalling social conditions which makes government intervention necessary, not the other way around. If the rich want to pay less taxes they need to invest more in business. Once the market conditions for employment are good and the debt generated to pay for their resource acquisition wars, nation building contracts, bailouts, and tax breaks, etc., is paid back then taxes can be cut back without turning the US into a 3rd world nation._________________

juniper wrote:

you experience political reality dilation when travelling at american political speeds. it's in einstein's formulas. it's not their fault.

While I'm sure there are many people feeling so entitled, it's still odd to talk shit about poor workers not paying income taxes.
If you make so little that you get a tax credit, what are you going to do: not claim it?

(Perhaps I'm merely not the target of the statement, although I am impoverished by US standards.)

But, high unemployment creates the appalling social conditions which makes government intervention necessary, not the other way around. If the rich want to pay less taxes they need to invest more in business. Once the market conditions for employment are good and the debt generated to pay for their resource acquisition wars, nation building contracts, bailouts, and tax breaks, etc., is paid back then taxes can be cut back without turning the US into a 3rd world nation.

I'm sorry but I disagree with your entire assertion here. You are advocating being dependent; either dependent on the government or dependent on others for employment.

the US should be a nation of entrepreneurs and employERS not emplyEES.

I'm sorry but I disagree with your entire assertion here. You are advocating being dependent; either dependent on the government or dependent on others for employment.

In a perfect world we would all be entirely self-sufficient, have plenty of land to ourselves to provide all our needs, and not require anyone else for anything. Unfortunately reality bites, and we realise we're social animals on limited land and resources, who need each other to specialise, survive, and grow as a species.

jonnevers wrote:

the US should be a nation of entrepreneurs and employERS not emplyEES.

You can't have entrepreneurs and employers without an abundance of employees to get non-trivial things done, and consumers to make all the work pay off._________________

juniper wrote:

you experience political reality dilation when travelling at american political speeds. it's in einstein's formulas. it's not their fault.

I really wish the Republicans had more modern moral/social bearings....

So do I. That's the main thing that keeps me from being a Republican (although I do vote for them, about half the time, to try and keep the evil, Borg-like, 1984 Party out of office)._________________Deja Moo: the feeling that you've heard this bull before

"Lazy victims who contribute nothing = Romney is just telling the truth."

petrjanda wrote:

Coming from a guy who is supposedly trying to win enough hearts and minds of the american people to make him the president, I find it ridiculous.

I don't find it ridiculous, but rather arrogant, naive or ignorant. You win people over by convincing them you have the better ideas. Even if it is impossible to win everyone, you don't help your own cause by insulting them. The problem isn't what he said, but how he said it.

petrjanda wrote:

I also find it even more ridiculous to think that the 47% of americans who will vote Obama do it because they feel like victims and "pay no taxes".

47% isn't likely correct, but easily in the 35-40% range. The same is true in reverse, obviously for different reasons.

petrjanda wrote:

How about those people who will simply not vote for Romney because he's no better than Obama?

Probably a much smaller percentage, and likely an overlapping group._________________lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

He probably didn't say lazy. I haven't heard it that many times, but I do think it was implied. He's not even wrong, but it isn't the way to go about discussing it.

Not everyone comes from a family with the advantages he had. Not everyone is exposed to the skills he learned to lead him where he was in the private sector (not referring to education, etc). So someone who may think they are a victim doesn't benefit by him (or others) denigrating them. Discussing solutions might go a long way. And just a reminder, I don't really disagree with him.

I must have retyped the word trying to make it fit. Can't seem to blame it on any of the Mtn. Dew keys._________________lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

It will be cited for decades as "Propaganda and the Press: Catalysts of the New American Authoritarianism" (in a book banned from shelves in the U.S. and not reviewed by the New York Times)._________________Deja Moo: the feeling that you've heard this bull before